Prevalence and Risk-Markers of Self-Harm in Autistic Children and Adults.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Licence L
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7502049 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Prevalence and Risk-Markers of Self-Harm in Autistic Children and Adults.
Licence Lucy L Oliver Chris C Moss Jo J Richards Caroline C
Journal of autism and developmental disorders 20201001 10
Self-harm is purportedly common in autistic individuals, but under-researched, particularly in younger samples and those without intellectual disability. This study aimed to describe prevalence, profile and correlates of self-harm in autistic individuals without impairments in adaptive functioning. Parents of autistic participants (n = 83) completed questionnaires regarding the presence/topography of self-harm, demographic characteristics, autism severity, age of diagnosis, affect, activity leve ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Suicide has been identified as a leading cause of premature death in autistic populations. Elevated autistic traits have also been associated with higher rates of self-harm, suicidal ideation, and suicidal self-harm in the general population, but this has yet to be examined in older age. Using baseline cross-sectional data from the PROTECT study, middle-age and older adults with high autistic traits (n = 276) had significantly higher rates of suicidal ideation, deliberate self-harm, and suicidal self-harm than an age/sex-matched comparison group (n = 10,495). These differences represented a 5- to 6-fold increase in likelihood for self-harming and suicidality. These findings, which remained when controlling for depression symptoms, suggest that middle-age and older adults with high autistic traits may be particularly at risk of self-harm and suicidal behaviours.
| S-EPMC10313542 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere are few prevalence studies of suicide attempts and non-suicidal self-harm (NSSH).AimsWe aimed to estimate the prevalence of thoughts of NSSH, suicidal thoughts, NSSH and suicide attempts among 18- to 34-year-olds in Scotland.MethodWe interviewed a representative sample of young adults from across Scotland.ResultsWe interviewed 3508 young people; 11.3 and 16.2% reported a lifetime history of suicide attempts and NSSH, respectively. The first episode of NSSH tended to precede the first suicide attempt by about 2 years. Age at onset of NSSH and suicide attempt was younger in females. Earlier age at onset was associated with more frequent NSSH/suicide attempts. Women are significantly more likely to report NSSH and suicide attempts compared with men.ConclusionsOne in nine young people has attempted suicide and one in six has engaged in NSSH. Clinicians should be vigilant, as suicide attempts and NSSH are relatively common.Declaration of interestNone.
| S-EPMC6003254 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceMultiple studies have reported that people with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are at a higher risk for self-injurious behavior and suicide. However, the magnitude of this association varies between studies.ObjectiveTo appraise the available epidemiologic studies on the risk of self-injurious behavior and suicidality among children and adults with ASD.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science were systematically searched for epidemiologic studies on the association between ASD and self-injurious behavior and suicidality. Databases were searched from year of inception to April through June 2020. No language, age, or date restrictions were applied.Study selectionThis systematic review and meta-analysis included studies with an observational design and compared self-injurious behavior (defined as nonaccidental behavior resulting in self-inflicted physical injury but without intent of suicide or sexual arousal) and/or suicidality (defined as suicidal ideation, suicide attempt, or suicide) in children (aged <20 years) or adults (aged ≥20 years) with ASD.Data extraction and synthesisInformation on study design, study population, ASD and self-harm definitions, and outcomes were extracted by independent investigators. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Overall summary odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs were estimated using DerSimonian-Laird random-effects models.Main outcomes and measuresThe ORs for the associations of ASD with self-injurious behavior and suicidality were calculated. Analyses were stratified by study setting and age groups as planned a priori.ResultsThe search identified 31 eligible studies, which were of moderate to high quality. Of these studies, 16 (52%) were conducted in children, 13 (42%) in adults, and 2 (6%) in both children and adults. Seventeen studies assessed the association between ASD and self-injurious behavior and reported ORs that ranged from 1.21 to 18.76, resulting in a pooled OR of 3.18 (95% CI, 2.45-4.12). Sixteen studies assessed the association between ASD and suicidality and reported ORs that ranged from 0.86 to 11.10, resulting in a pooled OR of 3.32 (95% CI, 2.60-4.24). In stratified analyses, results were consistent between clinical and nonclinical settings and between children and adults.Conclusions and relevanceThis study found that ASD was associated with a substantial increase in odds of self-injurious behavior and suicidality in children and adults. Further research is needed to examine the role of primary care screenings, increased access to preventive mental health services, and lethal means counseling in reducing self-harm in this population.
| S-EPMC8527356 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionAlthough autism inclusion and acceptance has increased in recent years, autistic people continue to face stigmatization, exclusion, and victimization. Based on brief 10-second videos, non-autistic adults rate autistic adults less favourably than they rate non-autistic adults in terms of traits and behavioural intentions. In the current study, we extended this paradigm to investigate the first impressions of autistic and non-autistic children by non-autistic adult raters and examined the relationship between the rater's own characteristics and bias against autistic children.MethodSegments of video recorded interviews from 15 autistic and 15 non-autistic children were shown to 346 undergraduate students in audio with video, audio only, video only, transcript, or still image conditions. Participants rated each child on a series of traits and behavioural intentions toward the child, and then completed a series of questionnaires measuring their own social competence, autistic traits, quantity and quality of past experiences with autistic people, and explicit autism stigma.ResultsOverall, autistic children were rated more negatively than non-autistic children, particularly in conditions containing audio. Raters with higher social competence and explicit autism stigma rated autistic children more negatively, whereas raters with more autistic traits and more positive past experiences with autistic people rated autistic children more positively.DiscussionThese rapid negative judgments may contribute to the social exclusion experienced by autistic children. The findings indicate that certain personal characteristics may be related to more stigmatised views of autism and decreased willingness to interact with the autistic person. The implications of the findings are discussed in relation to the social inclusion and well-being of autistic people.
| S-EPMC10587469 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSelf-harm (SH; intentional self-poisoning or self-injury) is common, often repeated, and strongly associated with suicide. This is an update of a broader Cochrane review on psychosocial and pharmacological treatments for deliberate SH, first published in 1998 and previously updated in 1999. We have now divided the review into three separate reviews. This review is focused on pharmacological interventions in adults who self harm.ObjectivesTo identify all randomised controlled trials of pharmacological agents or natural products for SH in adults, and to conduct meta-analyses (where possible) to compare the effects of specific treatments with comparison types of treatment (e.g., placebo/alternative pharmacological treatment) for SH patients.Search methodsFor this update the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group (CCDAN) Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the CCDAN Specialised Register (September 2014). Additional searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CENTRAL were conducted to October 2013.Selection criteriaWe included randomised controlled trials comparing pharmacological treatments or natural products with placebo/alternative pharmacological treatment in individuals with a recent (within six months) episode of SH resulting in presentation to clinical services.Data collection and analysisWe independently selected trials, extracted data, and appraised trial quality. For binary outcomes, we calculated odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). For continuous outcomes we calculated the mean difference (MD) and 95% CI. Meta-analysis was only possible for one intervention (i.e. newer generation antidepressants) on repetition of SH at last follow-up. For this analysis, we pooled data using a random-effects model. The overall quality of evidence for the primary outcome was appraised for each intervention using the GRADE approach.Main resultsWe included seven trials with a total of 546 patients. The largest trial included 167 participants. We found no significant treatment effect on repetition of SH for newer generation antidepressants (n = 243; k = 3; OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.36; GRADE: low quality of evidence), low-dose fluphenazine (n = 53; k = 1; OR 1.51, 95% CI 0.50 to 4.58; GRADE: very low quality of evidence), mood stabilisers (n = 167; k = 1; OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.33 to 2.95; GRADE: low quality of evidence), or natural products (n = 49; k = 1; OR 1.33, 95% CI 0.38 to 4.62; GRADE: low quality of evidence). A significant reduction in SH repetition was found in a single trial of the antipsychotic flupenthixol (n = 30; k = 1; OR 0.09, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.50), although the quality of evidence for this trial, according to the GRADE criteria, was very low. No data on adverse effects, other than the planned outcomes relating to suicidal behaviour, were reported.Authors' conclusionsGiven the low or very low quality of the available evidence, and the small number of trials identified, it is not possible to make firm conclusions regarding pharmacological interventions in SH patients. More and larger trials of pharmacotherapy are required. In view of an indication of positive benefit for flupenthixol in an early small trial of low quality, these might include evaluation of newer atypical antipsychotics. Further work should include evaluation of adverse effects of pharmacological agents. Other research could include evaluation of combined pharmacotherapy and psychological treatment.
| S-EPMC8637297 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8786273 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSelf-harm (SH; intentional self-poisoning or self-injury regardless of degree of suicidal intent or other types of motivation) is a growing problem in most countries, often repeated, and associated with suicide. Evidence assessing the effectiveness of pharmacological agents and/or natural products in the treatment of SH is lacking, especially when compared with the evidence for psychosocial interventions. This review therefore updates a previous Cochrane Review (last published in 2015) on the role of pharmacological interventions for SH in adults.ObjectivesTo assess the effects of pharmacological agents or natural products for SH compared to comparison types of treatment (e.g. placebo or alternative pharmacological treatment) for adults (aged 18 years or older) who engage in SH.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Specialised Register, the Cochrane Library (Central Register of Controlled Trials [CENTRAL] and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews [CDSR]), together with MEDLINE. Ovid Embase and PsycINFO (to 4 July 2020).Selection criteriaWe included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing pharmacological agents or natural products with placebo/alternative pharmacological treatment in individuals with a recent (within six months of trial entry) episode of SH resulting in presentation to hospital or clinical services. The primary outcome was the occurrence of a repeated episode of SH over a maximum follow-up period of two years. Secondary outcomes included treatment acceptability, treatment adherence, depression, hopelessness, general functioning, social functioning, suicidal ideation, and suicide.Data collection and analysisWe independently selected trials, extracted data, and appraised trial quality. For binary outcomes, we calculated odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence internals (CIs). For continuous outcomes we calculated the mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) and 95% CI. The overall certainty of evidence for the primary outcome (i.e. repetition of SH at post-intervention) was appraised for each intervention using the GRADE approach.Main resultsWe included data from seven trials with a total of 574 participants. Participants in these trials were predominately female (63.5%) with a mean age of 35.3 years (standard deviation (SD) 3.1 years). It is uncertain if newer generation antidepressants reduce repetition of SH compared to placebo (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.19; N = 129; k = 2; very low-certainty evidence). There may be a lower rate of SH repetition for antipsychotics (21%) as compared to placebo (75%) (OR 0.09, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.50; N = 30; k = 1; low-certainty evidence). However, there was no evidence of a difference between antipsychotics compared to another comparator drug/dose for repetition of SH (OR 1.51, 95% CI 0.50 to 4.58; N = 53; k = 1; low-certainty evidence). There was also no evidence of a difference for mood stabilisers compared to placebo for repetition of SH (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.33 to 2.95; N = 167; k = 1; very low-certainty evidence), or for natural products compared to placebo for repetition of SH (OR 1.33, 95% CI 0.38 to 4.62; N = 49; k = 1; lo- certainty) evidence.Authors' conclusionsGiven the low or very low quality of the available evidence, and the small number of trials identified, there is only uncertain evidence regarding pharmacological interventions in patients who engage in SH. More and larger trials of pharmacotherapy are required, preferably using newer agents. These might include evaluation of newer atypical antipsychotics. Further work should also include evaluation of adverse effects of pharmacological agents. Other research could include evaluation of combined pharmacotherapy and psychological treatment.
| S-EPMC8094615 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8786270 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSuicide prevention is a national priority for the UK government. Autistic people are at greater risk of experiencing self-harm and suicidal thoughts and behaviours than the general population. Safety plans are widely used in suicide prevention but have not yet been designed with and for autistic people. We developed the first safety plan specifically targeting suicidality in autistic adults: the Autism Adapted Safety Plan (AASP). It consists of a prioritised list of hierarchical steps that can be used prior to or during a crisis to mitigate risk of self-harm and suicidal behaviour. This is a pilot study that aims to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the AASPs and the research processes, including the response rates, potential barriers and reach of AASPs, methods of recruitment, what comprises usual care, and economic evaluation methods/tools.MethodsThis is an external pilot randomised controlled trial of a suicide prevention tool aimed at mitigating the risk of self-harm and suicidal behaviour in autistic adults: AASPs. Participants will be assessed at baseline and followed up 1 month and 6 months later. Assessments include questions about self-harm, suicidality, service use, and their experience of the AASP/taking part in the study. Autistic adults who have a clinical autism diagnosis and self-reported history of self-harm, suicidal thoughts, or suicidal behaviours within the last 6 months will be invited to take part in the study. Informed consent will be obtained. Participants will be recruited via community and third sector services (including community settings, autism charities, and mental health charities). They may also "self-refer" into the study through social media recruitment and word of mouth. Ninety participants will be randomised to either develop an AASP or receive their usual care in a 1:1 ratio.DiscussionThe present study will provide an evaluation of the suitability of the processes that would be undertaken in a larger definitive study, including recruitment, randomisation, methods, questionnaires, outcome measures, treatment, and follow-up assessments.Trial registrationISRCTN70594445, Protocol v4: 8/2/22.
| S-EPMC9972793 | biostudies-literature